From Canon212, we have learned that the Washington Theological College, located at 401 Michigan Avenue, NE, Washington DC 20017 will be conducting an "Alumni Days 2017" gathering. As you can see from this flyer, (and by the way, dear chancery moles, I downloaded it so if it "disappears", I can make it "reappear)" dissident Father James Martin, will be the keynote symposium speaker.
His topic is strangely called "Encountering Jesus: Meeting The Jesus Of History And The Christ Of Faith". Why are "Jesus" and "Christ" separated in that fashion? Any Catholic knows that while Jesus possesses two natures, divine and human, His Personhood is divine. As you'll see in thisanthology of posts concerning Martin, he does seem to have some trouble grasping the fact that Jesus Christ isn't just another guy. The commands of Jesus and His Father are truly to be obeyed - including those regarding the mortal sin of homosexual conduct.
Note that during this symposium, Cardinal Wuerl will be the principal celebrant at the Sunday Mass. You might also have noted in that anthology that Cardinal Wuerl invited Father Martin (fully aware of his serious heresies) to give the Good Friday meditations at St. Matthew's Cathedral. Did Cardinal Wuerl pull some strings to get Father Martin invited to this thing? Given recent history, I believe that is a fair question.
Let's give them a call and urge that Father Martin, on account of his dissidence regarding the gay lifestyle be rescinded. Faithful priests may wish to avoid this event. Other actions are under consideration.
Last week President Trump gave an address to the people of Poland. In that speech he uttered a key statement: "The fundamental question of our time is whether the west has the will to survive". While the president went on to answer in the affirmative, many of us aren't so certain whether that will exists. A website called The Trumpet analyzed these presidential remarks and I think in many ways they are spot-on.
We as a nation are quite lethargic when it comes to protecting our culture for we are besotted by sin and rejection of God. That rejection of God and exaltation of sin has become more and more ensconced in our legal and societal framework during these past few decades whereas in the early part of our nation's history, laws and customs at least gave perfunctory lip service to God and Christian values. We know that one key effect of sin on the one committing it is that their intellect is darkened and their will is weakened.
The weakening of the will and draining of the will to survive was evident even in Old Testament history. We can read in the books of Kings how King David, after his adultery with Bathsheba and murder of her husband Uriah, surrendered control over his own family. Thus he was lethargic when his son raped his daughter and was murdered by another son who would go on to almost overthrow David himself. Moving onto the Book of Judges we see how Samson was undone by his dalliance with Delilah. The loss of will to survive has been evident almost from the start of human existence.
Not only in the arena of civil governance do we see this creeping lethargy, but also among the ranks of many Catholics. For the sake of this post, I'm focusing on Catholics who exhibit a modicum of fidelity to the Faith by attending Mass and doing many good and charitable things within the context of their parishes. However, when it comes to facing real threats from within the Church leadership they reflexively turn blind eyes and deaf ears to the facts that are slapping them in the face.
This deliberate blindness and deafness is magnified even more when it comes to the ever-increasing number of misbehaviors by this current pope. I've commented about this before and now link to a LifeSiteNews article that's a few months old but still quite relevant. Anna Silvas, who is being interviewed in that article, postulates that an "affective papalism" might be a big cause of their blindness. That could well be a large part of the problem. An inordinate desire for a "simplistic Catholic faith" and the overvaluing of emotions and sentiments are also factors. When she states that Catholics who sound the alarm are berated, I can affirm that with my own experiences of being chided for being "dour" and "hateful", etc.
I now suggest that the seeking of the "simplistic" and "experiential" are inherently sinful for they involve willful (if somewhat reflexive) rejection of objective truth. Such embrace of a subtly sinful mindset will also dull the intellect, weaken the will and diminish the will to survive as Catholics.
So now I ask this question: do the readers of this blog have the will to see our Church survive for the sake of their own souls and those whom they love? Will they resist the insipid calls to "lighten up" and be willing not only to pray but to take decisive action if threats should present themselves? See here, here, here, and here. When (not "if" but "when") attacks present themselves, will we be ready to act? Will we, as a Church, have the will to survive?
Through Canon 212, I came across two posts. One is by George Neumayr entitled "The Roots Of Pope Francis' Anti-Americanism". The other is from a blog called The Deus Ex Machina and it's entitled "More Fog Lifting - FrancisPlan Becoming Clearer And Clearer". They might seem unrelated but I think there is a common theme running through both. Most progressives harbor deep hatred for western culture - that is, culture that largely originated in Europe from its Catholic roots and that spread throughout its various colonies. The United States of America is one of those offshoots. Owing to our constitutional republican form of government, we have certain safeguards that have helped retard the disintegration of our cultural roots as compared to Europe - but we aren't that far behind them. The progressives are literally hell-bent on expunging from society any vestige of belief and obedience to God and His Roman Catholic Church.
Sadly, they see in Pope Francis an ally in the pursuit of their goals. The US, again, remains as an obstacle to their plans. Had Hillary Clinton won the White House last November, their juggernaut could have processed with lightning speed. By God's grace, she lost and now the rate of decline has slowed somewhat. Hence the pot-shots that the pope has been lobbing in President Trump's direction - and towards us who abhor the progressive agenda.
Other recipients of papal pot-shots are faithful Catholics, particularly those of us who sound the alarm about malfeasances coming from the Vatican. In a development that is coming straight from the "niggers of the new age" department, we have been advised of a hit piece that appeared in Civilta Cattolica, a semi-official publication coming from the Vatican. One of the two authors is Father Antonio Spadaro (a subject of many posts) In that piece you can see the visceral hatred that Spadaro (and quite possibly the pope) harbor for those of us who shine the light on their shenanigans; Church Militant TV has particularly earned their scorn. Rorate Caeli has the full text. I think I'm not alone in opining that we faithful Catholic bloggers can take hit pieces like this as badges of honor.
I'd like to return to the "more fog lifting" piece for a moment. Towards the bottom of the article we read that Pope Francis is "trying to engineer a schism in the Catholic Church...to drive the Catholics out of the post-conciliar church, thereby leaving all the physical assets and cash for the FrancisChurch". This thought has occurred to me before. One must admit that his "gaffes" are becoming too numerous, too blatant for any reasonable and honest person to believe that they are merely innocent blunders. Of course Neumayr cannot say for certain just what is motivating the pope, but no one can honestly gainsay that there is some sort of ulterior motive behind Amoralis Lamentia, the way that faithful prelates are being treated, etc.
Do we have the honesty and intestinal fortitude to accept the truth that is literally slapping us in the face?
Cardinal Muller has been dismissed as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. We knew that was coming, owing to the Cardinal's stances on both Laudato Si and Amoris Laetitia. One Peter Five has further details of the dismissal interview. The pope summoned Cardinal Muller to a conference. Right away the Pope presented him with five questions in apparent mockery of the dubia issued a few months ago by the "dubia Cardinals". The questions are (with the Cardinal's replies):
Are you in favor of, or against, a female diaconate? “I am against it,” responded Cardinal Müller.
Are you in favor of, or against, the repeal of celibacy? “Of course I am against it,” the cardinal responded.
Are you in favor of, or against, female priests? “I am very decisively against it,” replied Cardinal Müller.
Are you willing to defend Amoris Laetitia? “As far as it is possible for me,” the Prefect of the Congregation for the Faith replied: “there still exist ambiguities.”
Are you willing to retract your complaint concerning the dismissal of three of your own employees? Cardinal Müller responded: “Holy Father, these were good, unblemished men whom I now lack, and it was not correct to dismiss them over my head, shortly before Christmas, so that they had to clear their offices by 28 December. I am missing them now.”
Any Catholic worthy of the name would have answered all five of these in the negative, as has the Cardinal. Immediately afterwards, the Pope announced to the Cardinal his dismissal from the post and abruptly ended the interview by walking out without even a "good bye".
When Cardinal Muller first complained about the manner of his dismissal, these details were not known. Now we can understand the Cardinal's complaint in the correct context. He also remarked that the Church should follow its own social teaching. I agree. For all the jibber-jabber about "dialogue" and "accompanying", those two elements were nowhere to be found in that conversation.
I will say one thing. The pope put forth five questions and received five very prompt replies. Will he now condescend to answer the cardinals' dubia?
Who's next? Will it be Cardinal Sarah? How about Archbishop Schneider or maybe Bishop Paprocki? Pray that the faithful prelates remain steadfast and show your support for them.
Last Tuesday I posted about the drug/sex orgy inside Vatican facilities that was busted by local police. This occurred in the apartment of Msgr Capozzi, who was so high on cocaine that he had to taken to a local hospital for detoxification.
Here they are! Whatever happened to all that "dialogue" and "encountering" and "tolerance" and "accompanying" and "listening"? Does that only happen when the end purpose is to quash piety, weaken the Faith, compromise Christ's moral teachings? I guess so!
This was featured at the "Convolution of Catholic Leadership" that concluded in Orlando a few days ago. The Vortex below gives more details of the disgusting way in which faithful Catholics, operating with Catholic donation dollars (and perhaps we should all stop donating to the national collections), are treated by their feckless "leaders". By the way - the "somewhat well-known blogger" mentioned at the 5:05 mark is Brandon Vogt, employee of Bishop Robert Barron. The latter is the quasi-heretic who called Martin Luther a "mystic of grace" and who thinks there is "reasonable hope that no one is in hell": and yes, he spoke at this Orlando gab-fest.
I speak of the parish council at St John Bosco parish, in the Archdiocese of Palmero located in Italy - Sicily to be precise. They have a parish priest named Don Alessandro Maria Minutella. The latter is being sacked by Archbishop Corrado Lorefice because he teaches the truth about marriage, Holy Communion, etc. He will not allow adulterers to receive Holy Communion and has publicly decried the language in Amoralis Lamentia that permits such abominations.
The parishioners are upset and understandably so. Knowing the proclivities of their bishop, they have reason to fear a progressive being named as Minutella's replacement. They are being diligent not only for their own souls but those of their families.
LifeSiteNews not only has more details of the situation but they also have a translation of the open letter that the local parish council sent to their bishop. They make plain the fact that they are not going to roll over and play dead, that they will not play the rubber stamp. They want at least to discuss the matter with the bishop. With all the kvetching about "dialogue" and "encounter", is this such a difficult concept for Lorefice to grasp? Or does that only work when the conversation favors progressivism?
Readers, I for one applaud the clarity and courage of this parish council. It is worthy of study and emulation. Let us ponder that last word, for many of us will most likely face such scenarios where we'll have to stand up to diocesan bullies who would spiritually starve us and our loved ones.
Meanwhile, we can add our voices to those of the parish council members. Here is the contact page from the diocesan site. Please write your own emails. Unless you are writing in Italian, I'd suggest brevity along with clarity. These chanceries do seem to respond to volumes of contact; let's make our own, shall we?
Joacim Cardinal Meisner passed away early this morining while on vacation. A cause of death has not been announced. Recall that Antonin Scalia also passed away while away from home. Color me suspicious; I wouldn't put anything past what is in the Vatican now.
Please pray for his eternal repose. The man did display courage in standing for the Truths of Our Church. May he rest in peace and may eternal light shine on him, O Lord.